Date of filing: 24.07.2017 Date of disposal: 05.03.2018
Complainant: Debnath Karmakar, S/o. Late Bakubihari Karmakar, resident of 7/4, Mahis Kapur Road, B-Zone, Durgapur, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 205.
Opposite Party: 1. The Director, M/s. Hahnemann Housing & Development (P) Ltd., Having its Branch Office at Durgapur, Sanjib Sarani, Aesby More, P.S. Durgapur, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 213.
2. Hahnemann Housing & Development (P) Ltd., Represented by its Director, having its office at Sanjib Sarani, Aesby More, P.S. Durgapur, District: Burdwan, PIN – 713 213.
3. Kalidas Mukherjee, S/o. Late Rabi Lochan Mukherjee, Director of Hahnemann Housing & Development (P) Ltd., having his residence at Beliatore, PO. & PS: Beliatore, Dist: Bankura, PIN – 722 203.
Present:
Hon’ble President: Smt. Jayanti Maitra (Ray).
Hon’ble Member: Smt. Nivedita Ghosh.
Hon’ble Member: Dr. Tapan Kumar Tripathy.
Appeared for the Complainant(s): Ld. Advocate, Suvro Chakraborty.
Appeared for the Opposite Party No. 1&2: None (ex parte)
J U D G E M E N T
The complainant has filed the present complaint against the Ops with a direction that OP should refund an amount of Rs. 2, 25,000=00 as per agreement from 15.01.2015 to till date of realization and further direction that Ops should pay a sum of Rs. 1, 00,000=00 towards mental pain, agony and harassment and a direction to pay Rs. 20,000=00 as litigation cost.
The case of the complainant is that the Ops wanted to sale plots of land by creating a project, namely, “Santiban-VI’ in reasonable price along with basic structure from the Ops.
The complainant further came to know that the booking amount for the said plot was Rs. 45,000=00 and on payment of such booking amount the Ops would execute an agreement for sale and as such the complainant paid Rs. 2,25,000=00 for the plot number P-1511, i.e., the total value of the plot to the Ops on 23.11.2011 and the Ops also issued a certificate of booking on 23.11.2011 which was valid up to 23.12.2014 and the Ops registered the booking of schedule mentioned plots in favour of complainant vide B.F. No. 171742. Though from the very beginning the Ops were reluctant to make any agreement for sale but after several requests the Ops made the agreement for sale on 16.01.2012 in respect of Plot No. 1511.
Further case of the complainant is as per agreement the complainant paid the total amount i.e. Rs. 2, 25,000=00 the Ops are bound to complete all necessary works within 3 years from the date of booking i.e. within 22.11.2014 and it was also mentioned in the said agreement that in case of withdrawal from the scheme after full payment, amount will be refunded in full along with interest.
The complainant has alleged that inspite of full payments the Ops failed to fulfill their parts and liabilities as well as failed to execute register deed of sale in favour of complainant and for that the complainants wants to withdraw booking form and further requested the Ops to refund this money which paid as per agreement and the Ops also agreed with the proposal of the complainant and asked him for submitting all original documents and as such the complainant also submitted all the original documents on 30.06.2015 and after receiving the said documents the Ops issued a receipt in favour of the complainant on the same day but unfortunately in spite of compliance of all the formalities, the complainant did not get back his money from the Ops but again the Ops on 13.01.2016 agreed to refund the amount by giving endorsement in the receiving of the documents.
The complainant also alleged that he had requested the Ops several times after submitting the documents for refunding his money but the Ops did not pay any heed to the words of the complainant and also did not give any reply and for that the complainant compelled to file the present claim application before this Forum.
The complainant further submitted that he is bonafide consumer of the Ops and the Ops received full amount of Rs. 2,25,000=00 but failed to hand over the plot of land with basic structure as per agreement and also failed to refund the total amount as per demand of the complainant as per clause of agreement executed in between them.
The cause of action arose on and from 13.01.2016 when the Ops ag5rreed to refund the amount to the complainant and gave their endorsement. After filing the present application, the complainants sent proper notice to the Ops and the Ops also received the same but failed to appear and accordingly it is fixed for ex parte hearing.
Now points for consideration:
How far claimants able to prove that they are entitled to receive total payment i.e., Rs. 2, 25,000=00 along with other claims from the Ops?
Let us consider how far complainants have able to prove the same against the Ops.
Decision with reasons:
To prove the allegation against the Ops both the complainant prayed to treat his petition of complaint as his evidence-in-chief through affidavit along with documents which are (i) Xerox copies of booking certificate dated 23.11.2011, (ii) Terms and Conditions, (iii) Agreement for sale dated 06.02.2012, (iv) Xerox copies of relevant pages of Bank Passbook money transaction between the complainants and the Ops during the period from 28.8.2011 to 12.12.2011.
The complainant booked to purchase a plot of land on 23.11.2011on payment of booking amount Rs. 2,25,000=00 from the Ops and the Ops also issued a certificate vide B.F. No. 171742 on the same day for receiving the said amount of Rs. 2,25,000=00 which was valid up to 23.12.2014.
It further appears that complainant has also able to prove that an agreement was executed between him with the Ops under some terms and conditions and also able to prove that the Ops failed to fulfill the said terms and conditions either by executing deed of conveyance or by refund all money which received from the complainant.
It also appears that the complainant has also able to prove that Ops agreed to pay money and for that asked the complainant to produce original papers i.e. original sale agreement, original booking certificate, original 1st booking counterpart, Voter Card (Xerox), Bank Passbook Front Page (Xerox) and as such the complainant produced all the papers but the Ops are kept themselves mum regarding this.
After perusing all the documents as produced by the complainant it is clear to us that there is no dispute that the complainant has able to prove him as consumer and the Ops are failed to render service by obey the terms and conditions of agreement. At the same time it is also clear from the attitude of both the Ops that they have received summons but not contested by filing written version.
Accordingly it is clear that there is no dispute that the complainant is able to prove that the Ops are liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. So the complainant is entitled to get back the money deposited to the account of the Ops and also entitled to get compensation towards deficiency in service, unfair trade practice, harassment and mental agony and also entitled to get litigation cost.
Hence, the complaint succeeds. Accordingly, it is
O r d e r e d
that the present Consumer Complaint being No. 128/2017 be and the same is allowed ex parte against the Ops with cost. The O.P. Nos. 1,2 & 3 are directed to pay Rs. 2, 25,000=00 either jointly or severally to the complainant along with interest @12% per annum from 23.11.2011 to till date of realization and the O.P. Nos. 1,2 & 3 are further directed to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000=00 as mental pain and harassment and Rs. 5,000=00 as litigation cost within 45 days from the date of passing of this order, in default, the complainant is at liberty to put the entire award in execution as per provisions of law.
Let plain copies of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per provisions of law.
Dictated & Corrected by me: (Jayanti Maitra (Ray)
President
(Nivedita Ghosh) DCDRF, Burdwan
President
DCDRF, Burdwan
(Tapan Kumar Tripathy) (Nivedita Ghosh)
Member Member
DCDRF, Burdwan DCDRF, Burdwan
